We are really new to ATV's, so this is probably a stupid question but here goes:

Why do ALL of the ATV makers lie about engine size?

Why call a 229 a 250? (Honda and Kawasaki)

Why call a 376 a 400? (Suzuki)

Why call a 421 a 450? (Yamaha)

Why call a 760 a 800? (Polaris. I think this one is the worst at 40cc's off!)

Granted, some of them are close but many are like the ones above. I would say that I wouldn't complain a bit if they were within 5 cc's of the real thing. e.g. calling a 495 a 500 or calling a 753 a 750. I understand that the quad makers want to give each quad a nice round number in the name. 250 just sounds better than 246!

So here is my next question:

Is it really so hard for the engine designers to simply MAKE THE ENGINE WHAT THEY WANT TO CALL IT??

I mean, say they set out to make a 250. Is it really so hard for an engine designer to stay within 5 cc's of this? Why? Are they saving money somehow by putting a 229 in a quad instead of a TRUE 250? How much more would each engine cost a company if they put a 250 in instead of a 229? I think most quad buyers would be willing to pay a few bucks more for a 250 than a 229 anyway, so why not make it a 250?


This ATV engine size thing kind of reminds me of monitor sizes for computers.

Example ad for computer monitor for sale:

"17 inch monitor (16" viewable)"

What the hell is that sh_t? Then why isn't it a 16" monitor, a__holes! What good is another friggin inch if I can't even view it!


Back to quads...

Is it that some quad buyers are so stupid that they don't even read the fine print that says that the 800cc machine that they just spent $8599 on is really just a 760? Knowing this, the quad makers figure they can "trick" some people into buying THEIR quad by lying about engine size? Naaahhh... this can't be it! Can it?

 

You are getting way too technical and picky...

The quads are labeled like they are because that is the class of atv that it belongs to. When comparing atvs that are similar in size and engine you want to be able to look at one number and know whether it compares to the others. You wouldnt want to have to find all of the quads with engine sizes 300-400 to compare 350 or 400 class quads would you? And when the manufacturer changes engines in a machine or increases the engine size you dont want to have to remember a new atv name either.

With polaris they already have a 700 class atv with almost exactly the same specifications as the 800. So calling it a 750 wouldnt be a significant change over the existing model. With Kawasaki the 700 and 750 quads are totally different machines, so the small class number differentiation is fine. Notice the brute force 650 and Prairie 700. they are also twins with just a different engine size and plastic. The bf is a 633, but the quad belongs in the 650 class with the rincon, grizzly and ac and not its own 633 class.

Granted there are exxagerations with the system but in the end it all works towards a simpler way to compare and relate to the different machines.

On monitors you are using a 17" piece of glass, so its a 17" monitor. Some have 16.1" viewable, others 15.9". Each has different levels of adjustment and in lcd monitors you have all sorts of different brightness and contrast ratios to remember. Often these specs are completely out of touch with the actual performance of the monitor. An lcd monitor is approximately 100% viewable so a 15" is actually 15" viewable since the entire section of the screen is open. You also have to worry about widescreen vs 4:3 sizing, especially when comparing monitor sizes. A 15" widescreen looks a lot different than a 15" 4:3.

 

Auto mfng's do the same thing. The new corvette is called a 5.7 L v8, when its actually 5.6 and some change, the 5.0 mustang was a 4.9 etc.

 

It's kind of like asking a woman how old she is. I think there is a scientific formula of actual age, stated age and looks like age, but I don't know the exact calculations.

 

350 CI = 5.735471 L
289 CI = 4.73586034 L
302 CI = 4.94889212 L

just for reference

 

And, as for adjusting things to fit an exact 350, or whatever, you are looking at cost. If the jug from a previous tooling, plus the head from a third gives the displacement 337cc, would you pay $500 more per unit to have them re-tool to fit your expectations?

I wouldn't.

 

This is what I'm asking. It depends on what this additional cost would be.

Would I pay $500 to go from a 337 to a 350? No

Would I pay $200 to go from a 229 to a 250? Yes

I guess the quad makers figure that this cost must be higher than what most people are willing to pay. Perhaps the cost is closer to your $500?

 

Perhaps this is getting picky but this is really just a small rant for me. I wasn't going to protest with a sign in front of the Suzuki dealer or anything.

I guess I really didn't look at it as being the "250 class" machine or the "400 class" machine. If you look at it that way, then it's fine how they name their quads. Like I said, I am new to quads, and when I 1st started shopping for one, I thought that when I saw 250 in the name, it meant that the engine was really close to a 250.

I thought it strange that if they were rounding things off to 250 or 350, why was the actual engine size always lower than the 250 or 350? None of the 250's are like a 255 or 260. They are all LESS than 250. Hmmm.....Shouldn't the 250 class machines be a range of machines from 230 to 270? Oops! My mistake. A 270 would be called a 300!

 

Polaris has some machines with engine sizes bigger than thier class size name, and they have the opposite too.

 

You are correct! I didn't see that before. Polaris has one quad with a bigger engine size than their class name. The Polaris 4X4 Sportsman 400 has a 425 in it! I do have to give Polaris credit for that one. There are a few, but not many, other quads where the cc's are less than 5 cc's over the class size name.